Purpose: The mechanisms that underlie the affect of acute program variables on muscle growth and strength development for strength/power athletes have been of great interest. This investigation examined the affects of two different resistance exercise protocols on muscle oxygenation, and the anabolic hormonal response to such exercise.Methods:Eleven experienced resistance-trained maleathletes performed four sets of the squat exercise using either a low-intensity, high-volume (LI; 15 repetitions at 60% one-repetition maximum [1-RM]) or high-intensity, low-volume (HI; 4 repetitions at 90% 1-RM) load. Venous blood samples were obtained before (Pre), immediate (IP), 20- (20P), and 40-min (40P) postexercise. Continuous-wave near-infrared spectroscopy was used to measure oxygen desaturation during exercise.Results:No differences in muscle deoxygenation were seen between LI and HI. However, time-dependent postexercise reoxygenation was significantly different between the two exercise sessions (35.3 17.4 s vs 24.5 14.3 s in LI and HI, respectively). Testosterone and growth hormone (GH) concentrations were significantly elevated from Pre at IP, 20P, and 40P in both LI and HI. GH concentrations were higher (P0.05) for LI than at HI at 20P and 40P.Conclusion:Muscle oxygen recovery kinetics appeared to be influenced by differences in the intensity and volume of exercise, and delayed reoxygenation appears to affect the GH response to exercise.Key Words:TESTOSTERONE, GROWTH HORMONE, WEIGHT TRAINING, NEAR-INFRARED SPECTROSCOPY, MUSCLE ISCHEMIA

Lets consider the information. Muscle oxygenation effects anabolic hormone function. Considering the purpose of strength training, this becomes extremely vital information. Would it then not be advantageous to be able to measure and monitor muscle oxygenation during resistance training to maximize anabolic hormone function? SmO2 through the MOXY sensor could be the tool that a modern resistance training need to maximize effectiveness and efficiency. The work that now needs to be continued is how and what SmO2 trends will yield the best results.

There are many tradition based techniques and routines used in weight lifting and resistance training. Considering that the large majority of the population who does resistance training has the goal of hypertrophy I wanted to jump on one of these traditional techniques: the drop set. This is a techniques used by some weightlifters to further muscular fatigue after failure at a specific weight. Please read this link for insight into what drop setting is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drop_set. This technique makes sense in the fundamental question what is fatigue and when is a muscle fatigues. If you do bicep curls with 30lbs to exhaustion, yes you are fatigued for that weight, but if you were to use less weight you could keep going. Therefore the idea of a drop set is obviously to maximize muscular fatigue. Does this make physiological sense for hypertrophy training or is it just another attempt at hardcore training, if I may use laymens terms. Having completed such a routine using the MOXY, and with the knowledge of numerous studies, including the one at the beginning of this thread, I have to say tradition may be correct on this technique. Using drop sets I was able to increase my low SmO2 state (hypoxic?) for an extended period of time which should increase GH release. Not only was I able to do this, I was still able to use at the beginning a maximal strength resistance. Therefore unlike doing low weight, high repetition training which will have an extended low SmO2 state, a drop set will give you this but also allow you to push the limits of your maximal strength.

And here where we use MOXY to see, whether some type of strength training may not be or may be beneficial for endurance workouts. How: If we see changes in limitation of delivery ( SmO2 drops and at the same time a change in tHb we know , that we have more strenght but not as a positive effect to the delivery problem of energy. This will create a very typical NIRS picture at the end of a load or at the end of a endurance assessment. We will show this trend as soon we have enough samples to be sure it is not just by 10 - 20 people but we can show and follow it by 100 plus people.

Source

Abstract

Thirty-two untrained men [mean (SD) age 22.5 (5.8) years, height 178.3 (7.2) cm, body mass 77.8 (11.9) kg] participated in an 8-week progressive resistance-training program to investigate the "strength-endurance continuum". Subjects were divided into four groups: a low repetition group (Low Rep, n = 9) performing 3-5 repetitions maximum (RM) for four sets of each exercise with 3 min rest between sets and exercises, an intermediate repetition group (Int Rep, n = 11) performing 9-11 RM for three sets with 2 min rest, a high repetition group (High Rep, n = 7) performing 20-28 RM for two sets with 1 min rest, and a non-exercising control group (Con, n = 5). Three exercises (leg press, squat, and knee extension) were performed 2 days/week for the first 4 weeks and 3 days/week for the final 4 weeks. Maximal strength [one repetition maximum, 1RM), local muscular endurance (maximal number of repetitions performed with 60% of 1RM), and various cardiorespiratory parameters (e.g., maximum oxygen consumption, pulmonary ventilation, maximal aerobic power, time to exhaustion) were assessed at the beginning and end of the study. In addition, pre- and post-training muscle biopsy samples were analyzed for fiber-type composition, cross-sectional area, myosin heavy chain (MHC) content, and capillarization. Maximal strength improved significantly more for the Low Rep group compared to the other training groups, and the maximal number of repetitions at 60% 1RM improved the most for the High Rep group. In addition, maximal aerobic power and time to exhaustion significantly increased at the end of the study for only the High Rep group. All three major fiber types (types I, IIA, and IIB) hypertrophied for the Low Rep and Int Rep groups, whereas no significant increases were demonstrated for either the High Rep or Con groups. However, the percentage of type IIB fibers decreased, with a concomitant increase in IIAB fibers for all three resistance-trained groups. These fiber-type conversions were supported by a significant decrease in MHCIIb accompanied by a significant increase in MHCIIa. No significant changes in fiber-type composition were found in the control samples. Although all three training regimens resulted in similar fiber-type transformations (IIB to IIA), the low to intermediate repetition resistance-training programs induced a greater hypertrophic effect compared to the high repetition regimen. The High Rep group, however, appeared better adapted for submaximal, prolonged contractions, with significant increases after training in aerobic power and time to exhaustion. Thus, low and intermediate RM training appears to induce similar muscular adaptations, at least after short-term training in previously untrained subjects. Overall, however, these data demonstrate that both physical performance and the associated physiological adaptations are linked to the intensity and number of repetitions performed, and thus lend support to the "strength-endurance continuum".

a low repetition group (Low Rep, n = 9) performing 3-5 repetitions maximum (RM) for four sets of each exercise with 3 min rest between sets and exercises, an intermediate repetition group (Int Rep, n = 11) performing 9-11 RM for three sets with 2 min rest, a high repetition group (High Rep, n = 7) performing 20-28 RM for two sets with 1 min rest, and a non-exercising control group

As you can see, we do not have one single physiological indicator whether and how far this athletes deoxygenate, whether they always deloaded to the same level and how and whne did they reoxygenate.As well we could have taken a SEMG as an additional feedback on the information, on their performance instead of numbres and numbers. Having a change in rest period to 1 2 3 min will give a very different reaction possibly even independent from the weight due to the re and deloading of the muscels. Here an example in pictures. Pic 1 and 2. Same load in maximal % of each of this clients. and same rest period and you can see the difference in reaction despit same load same rest. There is a big likley hood that the end result will be different.

To-date, there are numerous posts throughout the MOXY forum referencing variety of O2 association / dissociation, and related implications RE: bioavailability. Can either of you discuss/describe possible practical applications of combining capnometer (such as EMMA), prior to beginning a MOXY coached strength and conditioning session ???

"It is necessary but not enough" - so you can say about so many things.

Injections maybe more. Injections != training hormones

Evaluate everything in the right scale, as in this picture.All heavy workouts are inevitably combined with stress and hormone release.But all the main factors inside each muscle cell.Not the muscles, but every cell, regardless of all the neighboring cells.

AndEven FSR correlates only when the correction for edama is made, and only when the stage of microtraction has passed.Those.When muscle microtraction of muscles disappears, and only then does a reliable correlation of protein synthesis and muscle growth and strength appear.

Insert Photos

Web address (URL)

Image URL

If your URL is correct, you'll see an image preview here. Large images may take a few minutes to appear.
Remember: Using others' images on the web without their permission may be bad manners, or worse, copyright infringement.